About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
MSNBCW 7
CNNW 3
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13
him before he receives miranda warning is the right thing to do. a short time ago, the aclu put out a statement saying every defendant is entitled to defend miranda lights. five lawmakers want him treated as an enemy combatant. 53 people remain in boston hospitals today, three in critical condition, including a 7-year-old girl. nbc news national investigative correspondent michaels i cough is in boston, ron allen outside boston's beth israel medical center where the suspect and many of the victims are being kept and kristen we willinger at the white house, let's get to the latest on investigation. for that, we turn to michaels i cough, again, in boston. what is the fbi focusing on today and moving forward? >> reporter: federal prosecutors are focusing on drafting a criminal complaint we could see as early as this afternoon, detailing the criminal charges against him supported by an affidavit from an fbi agent that would lay out some details of the plot. not all of them but could provide crucial new information for us about what tsarnaev actually did and raise and shed some light on
by federal authorities. but in the beginning, he will not be given the usual miranda warning about the right to remain silent. instead, the government will invoke a rule that allows questioning a suspect without giving advice of rights. >> there is a public safety exemption in cases of national security, and central charges involving acts of terrorism, and so government has that opportunity right now. >> the government invoked that same rule in the case of the so-called underwear bomber. as in his case, it allows questioning to learn of any potential plots or accomplices that could present a continuing threat. >> the first questions the fbi will focus on are specific threats that he might be aware of. likely, are there any other improvised explosive devices? were there other people working in the network? the sorts of things that go directly to whether or not there's a continuing threat to public safety. >> reporter: he'll face charges brought by the justice department, because terrorism is a federal crime with a trial in a regular civilian court. and as in other high profile terrorism cases
decided not to read the suspect his miranda warnings and rights. what advantage does that give them now? >> as it was being discussed last night, he is still entitled to his miranda rights. what it means any information they collected before giving that warning cannot be used in court against him. but they probably have a ton of data already. they probably don't need a confession, and they don't need questions that lead to evidence for the prosecution, because they have the video evidence and they have forensic evidence, and i am sure they have dna evidence now because there has been blood and a fight. so they are more interested in trying to get information for him to identify whether there are any more accomplices or relationships to foreigners. >> is there anybody else out there? >> of course, that's question number one. and for the information gathering they are doing now is totally separate from the case they will be making in court. >> they are trying to piece together not just the last few days but in some cases the last year, or more than a last year, and one of the questions is
to find out how much he knows. he's not been read his miranda rights. people are familiar with what mie ran da means. when ever the police arrest somebody stla to tell them that they have the riepght to remain silent and anything they say can be used against them in court. that i plies when there's an immediate threat to the public safety or the offers doing t interrogation. you pointed out there's suspicions and maybe accomplices. we don't know if there were other devices. certainly the fi by is remieing on a lot of what we know. >> you've cut to the very heart of the first and maybe biggest controversy is whether he should be read his rights or encouraged to speak as freely as possible without an attorney present. that's the other part of the miranda proses. the part that you have the right to an attorney. they don't particularly want him to have an attorney right now. >> mie ran y rairanda was invok protect rights. it can impede an investigation but it's to provide personalization and due process. the supreme court was careful in 1984 to charve out this exception to that says if ther
not get his miranda rights. >> among of group of republicans calling for the boston bombing suspect to be considered an enemy combatant. that means he would not have the same constitutional protection as a regular citizen, with regard to what he says as the investigation moves forward. will this happen? california congressman, a senior member of the intelligence committee. congressman, always good to see you. i know that you disagree with the congressman and think that the suspect is in custody. is entitled to his miranda rights. why? >> well, i think the administration is handling it exactly correct. there is a public safety exception under the miranda allowing law enforcement to interview him, making sure there are no other bombs, threats, perpetrators still out there giving the law enforcement flexibility to do the that prior to miranda and i think the court will interpret it broadly and give them the time they need to make sure that the public is safe. after that, he will have to be mirandized, doesn't mean the end of cooperation, but no basis yet to conclude they should be trea
, as well. mccain and graham says the injured suspect is not entitled to his miranda rights. they want him to be treated as an enemy combatant. it's a non-debate for him. the mother-in-law she is sickened by the horror inflicted. the family realizes now they never really new tamerian tsarnaev, the suspect number one and cannot begin to comprehend this tragedy. we are all over the developments including something going on in the city of chicago. more on that in a second. here is what we got for you now. mike tobin in watertown, massachusetts. what is the latest on the investigation there. ed henry at the white house responding to all these crosscurrents everywhere. to eric shawn where the injured suspect remains not surprisingly under heavy guard. mike? >> reporter: neil, this is the i dill i can neighborhood where it came to an end in a blaze of gunfire. the view of the helicopter pilot had there was someone hiding in that boat. he was wounded and bleeding, dzhokar tsarnaev half an hour from the cover of night that could have allowed him to move again. there were federal agents and guns dr
okayed the suspension of the suspect's miranda rights. is that a temporary suspension? >> reporter: yes, by law it is. it's called the public safety exception to the miranda rule. normally you have to tell someone they have a right to remain silent and if you don't, then you can't use anything they tell you in court. so that's why the miranda warning is given. but there is an exception. you don't have to do it if there's a possible threat to public safety. and here obviously there's a concern about whether there are potential accomplices. investigators say they haven't found any. or other explosives. they say they haven't found any of those either but that's what they want to ask him. and this exception probably begins to expire the moment you invoke it so it's probably no good for more than a day or two but nonetheless they can do that. afterwards they'll have to give him his miranda warning and say whether he'll continue to answer questions. the justice department says even in very serious cases like this, most people in custody do continue to talk. >> pete, who's going to be interrog
's before he gets the miranda rights. the fact that he can't speak right now, does that push back that window of time because they're not getting anything from him? >> that's a good question that i won't speculate on without a legal background. i'll leave that one up to the master pete williams. but i can imagine there's got to be some sort of gray area there that some lawyer could look at. on that point, though, i think it's interesting, where we've gone now from, alex, is we've gone from this, all right, what exactly happened, to these real sort of questions surrounding the national security of this country, and how exactly these two individuals were able to go forward with what they ultimately accomplished. so this morning, sort of around that point, talking to folks related to the house homeland security committee, they say they really want to sort of get this investigation rolling on why these two individuals seem to have slipped through the u.s. intelligence community, especially after that information reported yesterday that the russians were concerned about the older broth
. >> gregg: we have toe concerned about miranda rights -- that is irrelevant. there is plethora of evidence and he allegedly confessed to the carjacking. so what do you want to do is fi out other planned attacks and accomplices? >> absolutely. you want to find out who was involved in a broader plan, if there is a broader plan. at were all the bombs that were thrown athe police, where were they slated for and is there anybody else lurking i the wings? the trick will be to chip to his heart and who is close to heart andse the leverage. misrepresent the facts, they will be arrested. >> gregg: the supreme court has said so. >> one thousand percent. this is the perfect scenario. all the leverage is on the side of the investigators. he has no idea. he is 19. he is dumb as rocks. he failed six out of seven classes in college. he forgott surveillance video existed in america by the bombing on monday. he is naive and impressionable. they can get to i am. >> gregg: you want to look at all electronic communications and personal property and his car. anybody he might have communicated with. >> it's ong
to answer this first, chris. let's talk about miranda here and the fact that his rights have not been read to him. what do you make of that? will that be an issue going forward in this particular case? >> you know, it depends. first, i don't know -- we don't know if he's said anything. if he hasn't made any statements at all, the fact that he didn't get his miranda rights read is not going to be an a relevant issue. if he's made statements i think what the government is doing in expanding that public safety exception beyond the immediacy of the act i think is something that will be taken up, and it will have to be looked at maybe by the u.s. supreme court who just last week heard oral argument in the case from houston that was asking the question when does the fifth amendment or when does your right to remain silent gyp, and so we're already looking at these issues. this is an expansion i think that expands the public safety exception. i think some court is going to have to look at that. >> thank you very much. it's been almost a week now since this city was terrorized, and it's seemingly
by a military tribunal and not read his miranda rights. yes, susan collins, a voice of reason and bipartisan reason. telling reporters that if the person apprehended happens to be a foreign national -- what a disgrace and what an insult to the american system of justice. and what ignorance. the fifth amendment of the constitution which protects the right to due process is quite clear about who it applies to. it reads no person shall be held to answer for capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. nor be deprived of life, liberty of process. not no citizen, no person. french national is arrested in a bar fight, he gets access to a lawyer, is arraigned, charged and tried. we don't have some special carve out in the law for foreigners. our laws are our laws. and yet 12 years after the horrors of 9/11, we created a new special carved out area of law. we have a republican rushing to repeat the same mistakes, to place the perpetrators outside of our normal league system. susan collins should take the time to read the report. it is a useful, timely re
incriminating evidence against him, there will be a necessity to advise him of his miranda warnings. they are probably discussing the timing, the first priority to protect the public. but they don't want to jeopardize their case. but there is no much evidence, my guess that will be a lesser consideration in their deliberations. >> you are right. the public safety exemption-- the interrogation has to be limited and focused. but that's not the case if he were to be declared an enemy combatant. now senator lindsay graham says he should be declared an enemy combatant so a thorough interrogation, a lengthy one without limits could be undertaken. would you agree with that? >> i know, i think it's hard to judge from a distance, without greater information. so, no, i wouldn't be calling to treat him as an enemy combatant without more information. the consequence is, you treat him like an enemy combatant, you may have a longer interview that may or may not give you better information than if you mirandize him. but it poses a real problem, in terms of prosecutes him and bringing him to judge.
yesterday applauding the suspension of miranda rights for the teenage suspect. he even suggested we haven't gone far enough. and advocated for labeling the suspect an enemy combatant. by defining this week's events as terrorism, we endow the violence with political meaning. when we call their homemade bombs but not adam lanza's bush master xm 15 rifle weapons of mass destruction, we sent out a trajectory for the prosecution when we focus on months that one suspect spent overseas rather than the years that both spent in the u.s. we assume a limited geography for the incubation of evil. so here we go. the crisis is over and the politics begin. folks, this is actually the most dangerous part. with me at the table today is msnbc contributor and georgetown university professor, michael eric dyson. valerie core, a writer and fi filmmak filmmaker. co-host of the cycle and robert pape, director of the project security and -- >> bb, let me start with you. what do you think happened this week? >> what i think happened is we had homegrown terrorism come to the united states. since 9/11, this is the
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13